|
|
|
CARRIER iQ, Inc. Sued in Class Action
Court News |
2011/12/05 10:22
|
New York City based Horwitz, Horwitz & Paradis, Attorneys at Law and Los Angeles based Kiesel Boucher & Larson LLP announced this morning that they have filed a nationwide class action lawsuit against Mountain View, California based CARRIER iQ, Inc. on behalf of a class comprised of all persons and entities who own an electronic device, including but not limited to, smartphones, feature phones, tablets, and electronic-readers (collectively, the "Electronic Devices"), in which CiQ's Mobile Intelligence software application is installed.
The class action complaint, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, alleges that CiQ manufactures a software application that, unbeknownst to Class members, was embedded into a wide variety of Electronic Devices, including but not limited to, smartphones, feature phones, tablets, and electronic-readers, purchased by Class members over the past six years. Plaintiff further alleges that CiQ utilized its software application to illegally intercept, collect, and share the data and communications sent or received by Class members over their Electronic Devices in which CiQ's software application has been secretly installed for approximately six years.
More specifically, Plaintiff alleges that CiQ's software application enabled CiQ to illegally intercept and monitor all communications that are sent to, and received by, an Electronic Device in which CiQ's software is installed. CiQ's software does so by: (i) intercepting and recording all keystrokes depressed on the Electronic Devices; (ii) intercepting, reading and displaying the actual text of all text messages sent from, or received by, the Electronic Devices; and (iii) intercepting, reading and displaying all Internet browser searches conducted on private Wi-Fi networks
In commenting on the allegations of the Class Action Complaint, Plaintiff's attorney Paul O. Paradis remarked, "The vast nature of CiQ's illegal interception activities and the fact that the Company's illegal activities were able to be conducted without detection for nearly 6 years is frightening. In the digital age in which we live, the revelation of CiQ's illegal electronic interception activities is a watershed moment for privacy advocates around the world and serves as an alarming wake up call to all of us who are concerned about protecting the privacy of confidential communications of any type." Attorney Paul Kiesel added, "At this juncture of the litigation, it appears that in excess of 140 million class members were victimized by CiQ's illegal interception activities. That fact, in and of itself, is stunning."
Plaintiff alleges that CiQ's illegal interception and data collection and sharing activities violated both the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act and California's Invasion of Privacy Act, as well as other laws intended to protect Class member's privacy and property interests. Plaintiff seeks statutory damages, restitution, punitive damages on behalf of himself and all Class members, as well as an injunction enjoining Defendant from continuing the illegal practices complained of in the Complaint.
If you have any information concerning practices complained of in the Class Action Complaint or would like further information regarding this nationwide class action, please contact Paul O. Paradis at 212-986-4500 or e-mail at pparadis@hhplawny.com or Paul Kiesel at 310-854-4444 or email at kiesel@kbla.com.
Horwitz, Horwitz & Paradis, Attorneys at Law, and Kiesel Boucher & Larson, LLP have been retained as two of the law firms to represent the Class. The attorneys at Horwitz, Horwitz & Paradis, Attorneys at Law, and Kiesel Boucher & Larson, LLP have extensive experience in prosecuting class action cases, and have been appointed as Lead Counsel in numerous major class actions by federal and state courts across the United States and have obtained major recoveries on behalf of injured parties. |
|
|
|
|
|
Court will decide question on crack sentencing
Court News |
2011/11/28 09:40
|
The Supreme Court will decide whether a law meant to reduce the disparity between crack and powder cocaine prison sentences can apply those who were convicted — but not sentenced — before its enactment.
The high court on Monday agreed to hear an appeal from Edward Dorsey and Corey Hill, who were both convicted of crack cocaine crimes.
However, the men were not sentenced until after The Fair Sentencing Act went into effect. That law reduces the difference between sentences for crimes committed by crack cocaine and powder cocaine users.
The two men argue that because their sentences came after the law's effective date, they should get its lesser prison time. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed, and the high court will review that decision. |
|
|
|
|
|
Two plead guilty to distributing heroin
Court News |
2011/11/15 11:24
|
Two Kansas residents have pleaded guilty to distributing heroin in Wichita in a case that also involved 10 other people.
The U.S. Attorney's office says 28-year-old Patrice Chadwick, of Wichita, and 30-year-old Christopher Schneider, of Rose Hill, entered the pleas Tuesday in federal court.
Chadwick admitted that in October 2010, she picked up 50 packets of heroin that another woman had left in a supermarket restroom and delivered it to a third defendant. Chadwick also admitted receiving 100 packets of heroin mailed to her from New York by another defendant in the case.
In his plea, Schneider admitted delivering two bags of heroin to another woman at her workplace.
Eleven of the 12 people charged in the case have pleaded guilty, while one other is awaiting trial.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russia court rejects $16 billion claim against BP
Court News |
2011/11/14 11:24
|
A Russian court on Friday rejected a $16 billion claim against BP PLC filed by an obscure minority shareholder in BP's Russian venture, TNK-BP.
The court victory may have softened the blow that BP sustained when Rosneft dropped it as a partner in developing Russia's untapped Arctic oil and gas riches. The multibillion dollar deal broke down after TNK-BP's Russian billionaire shareholders blocked it, claiming that BP should be pursuing it through TNK-BP.
The Arbitration Court in the Tyumen region in Siberia on Friday dismissed two motions filed by a group of minority shareholders led by Andrei Prokhorov, who owns 0.0000106 percent in TNK-BP. The lawsuits are a $13 billion claim against BP and a $2.8 billion suit against two BP-nominated directors on TNK-BP's board.
Prokhorov and other shareholders claimed that BP and its representatives damaged TNK-BP's interests by failing to include the Russian venture in the Arctic deal with Rosneft.
BP's Russian partners in TNK-BP have denied any connection to the minority shareholder's suit. The claim was the reason why Russian police raided BP's office in August, which happened just days after Rosneft teamed up with ExxonMobil to develop the Arctic. |
|
|
|
|
|
First U.S. class-action overdraft fee case settles
Court News |
2011/11/11 09:41
|
Union Bank, part of Japan's Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc , agreed to pay $35 million to settle the first class-action lawsuit arising from nationwide litigation accusing lenders of charging excessive overdraft fees.
The litigation consolidates lawsuits filed against more than two dozen U.S., Canadian and European lenders such as JPMorgan Chase & Co , Citigroup Inc and Wells Fargo & Co .
It accuses lenders of routinely processing transactions from largest to smallest rather than in chronological order. This can cause account balances to fall more quickly, and overdraft fees, typically $25 or $35, to pile up faster.
A notice of the Union Bank settlement was filed on Wednesday with the U.S. District Court in Miami. The settlement requires approval by U.S. District Judge James Lawrence King, who oversees the litigation.
King granted class certification in the Union Bank case in July. That meant that customers, estimated in the tens of thousands, could sue the San Francisco-based bank as a group. |
|
|
|
|